Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search

New Guidelines To Evaluate The Response To Treatment In Solid Tumors.

P. Therasse, S. Arbuck, E. Eisenhauer, J. Wanders, R. S. Kaplan, L. Rubinstein, J. Verweij, M. van Glabbeke, A. V. van Oosterom, M. Christian, S. Gwyther
Published 2000 · Medicine
Referenced 1 time by Citationsy Users

Cite This
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
Share
Anticancer cytotoxic agents go through a process by which their antitumor activity-on the basis of the amount of tumor shrinkage they could generate-has been investigated. In the late 1970s, the International Union Against Cancer and the World Health Organization introduced specific criteria for the codification of tumor response evaluation. In 1994, several organizations involved in clinical research combined forces to tackle the review of these criteria on the basis of the experience and knowledge acquired since then. After several years of intensive discussions, a new set of guidelines is ready that will supersede the former criteria. In parallel to this initiative, one of the participating groups developed a model by which response rates could be derived from unidimensional measurement of tumor lesions instead of the usual bidimensional approach. This new concept has been largely validated by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group and integrated into the present guidelines. This special article also provides some philosophic background to clarify the various purposes of response evaluation. It proposes a model by which a combined assessment of all existing lesions, characterized by target lesions (to be measured) and nontarget lesions, is used to extrapolate an overall response to treatment. Methods of assessing tumor lesions are better codified, briefly within the guidelines and in more detail in Appendix I. All other aspects of response evaluation have been discussed, reviewed, and amended whenever appropriate.
This paper references
cancer treatment. Cancer 1981;47:207–14
S Green (1981)
M Ltd
SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals
A Beckman
Appraisal of methods for the study of chemotherapy of cancer in man : comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and thio phos - phoamide
CG Zubrod (1960)
Children's Cancer Study Group
Appendix Iv Participants
10.1016/0021-9681(60)90137-5
Appraisal of methods for the study of chemotherapy of cancer in man: Comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and triethylene thiophosphoramide
C. Zubrod (1960)
land): World Health Organization Offset Publication No
AB Miller (1979)
10.2165/00128415-200309530-00002
The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products
Tau Fluvalinate (1997)
M S Vergote
Novartis Barbet
Terenziani, National Cancer Institute
A James
Kingston); T. Uscinowicz, Health Canada, Bureau of Pharmaceutical Assessment (Ottawa); I. Tannock
J Pater
International Breast Cancer Study Group and Istituto Europeo di
E Colleoni
Scottish Cancer Therapy Network United Kingdom Coordinating Committee on Cancer Research (Nottingham); K. Noever, Bio-Imaging Technologies
U Cerny
ON); D. Warr, Ontario Cancer Institute/Princess Margaret Hospital (Toronto); P. Liati, South Europe New Drugs Organization
Health Klein
G Schwartsmann
Additional comments were received from the following
M G Zurlo
Chronic Dis 1960;11:7–33
J phoamide (1960)
NOTE Manuscript received June
(1999)
10.1002/1097-0142(19810101)47:1<207::AID-CNCR2820470134>3.0.CO;2-6
Reporting results of cancer treatment
A. Miller (1981)
10.1038/bjc.1982.83
WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment
M. Palmer (1982)
10.1002/SIM.4780090803
Historical and methodological developments in clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute.
E. Gehan (1990)
Retrospective Analyses
CALGB)
Cancer Grinblatt
10.1080/09553008014551861
WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment
R. Hunter (1980)
Eisenhauer , National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (Kingston); S. Gwyther, East Surrey Hospital (Redhill, U.K.); and J. Wanders, New Drug Development Office Oncology
Therasse
Appraisal of methods for the study of chemotherapy of cancer in man: comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and thio phosphoamide
Cg Zubrod (1960)
10.1177/000348947108000408
References
(1971)
Magnitude of time to disease progression disagreements when differences existed* No. of patients % (of 234, see above) No. of progressors with differing progression dates 19 8
V Appendix
Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte contre le Cancer
Eortc Bruntsch
10.1093/JNCI/91.6.523
Measuring response in solid tumors: unidimensional versus bidimensional measurement.
K. James (1999)
A Delaloye
IN); A. Trotti, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group
F B Stehman
10.1177/0284185173014S33406
Treatment
A. Satterfield (1938)
10.32388/m70yg6
根治的前立腺全摘術における神経移植 : Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centerの経験
大堀 理 (2000)
10.1007/978-1-4613-1739-5_19
The Pediatric Oncology Group
B. Leventhal (1989)
10.1001/ARCHOTOL.1969.00770030216025
Reporting results.
T. Walsh (1969)



This paper is referenced by
10.1016/j.radonc.2009.03.005
Central thoracic lesions treated with hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy.
M. Milano (2009)
10.1007/s12149-009-0257-1
Clinical significance of performing 18F-FDG PET on patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a summary of a Japanese multicenter study
T. Kaneta (2009)
10.2169/INTERNALMEDICINE.48.2432
Cancer of unknown primary site in which tumor marker-oriented chemotherapy was effective and pancreatic cancer was finally confirmed at autopsy.
K. Ohtsubo (2009)
10.1093/annonc/mdn412
Noncytotoxic suramin as a chemosensitizer in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study.
M. A. Villalona-Calero (2008)
10.1007/s10637-005-2904-2
A phase I study of T900607 given once every 3 weeks in patients with advanced refractory cancers; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC–CTG) IND 130
K. Gelmon (2005)
10.1038/sj.bjc.6602572
Report of two protocol planned interim analyses in a randomised multicentre phase III study comparing capecitabine with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin with cisplatin in patients with advanced oesophagogastric cancer receiving ECF
K. Sumpter (2005)
10.1016/J.CLON.2005.05.009
Epithelial ovarian cancer: a review of current management.
A. Guppy (2005)
10.4030/JJCS1979.30.2_126
Expression Level of Orotate Phosphoribosyltransferase mRNA in Colorectal Cancer : Correlation with Clinicopathological Factors and Clinical Efficacy of 5-fluorouracil-based Chemotherapy
H. Ishida (2005)
10.1093/ANNONC/MDI737
Gene profile and response to treatment.
J. Smeds (2005)
10.3816/CLC.2005.S.006
Targeting multiple signal transduction pathways in lung cancer.
A. Adjei (2005)
10.1007/3-540-31303-6_378
Empfehlungen zur Bewertung der Tumorremission
K. Jordan (2006)
10.1200/JCO.2005.09.111
Increased HER2 gene copy number is associated with response to gefitinib therapy in epidermal growth factor receptor-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients.
F. Cappuzzo (2005)
10.1007/S11912-005-0037-6
Novel kinase inhibitors in renal cell carcinoma: Progressive development of static agents
A. Desai (2006)
10.1200/JCO.2005.51.008
Combining gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced biliary cancer: a phase II trial.
J. Knox (2005)
10.1007/s10549-004-1720-2
A multicentre phase II study on gefitinib in taxane- and anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer
G. Minckwitz (2004)
10.5306/wjco.v5.i5.858
Erlotinib usage after prior treatment with gefitinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A clinical perspective and review of published literature.
Navneet Singh (2014)
10.22037/UJ.V9I4.1798
Efficacy of taxotere, thalidomide, and prednisolone in patients with hormone-resistant metastatic prostate cancer.
H. Rezvani (2012)
10.1093/annonc/mdq216
Phase I trial of dose-escalated cisplatin with concomitant cetuximab and hyperfractionated-accelerated radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.
T. Kuhnt (2010)
10.3816/CLC.2009.n.035
Treatment rationale and study design for the pointbreak study: a randomized, open-label phase III study of pemetrexed/carboplatin/bevacizumab followed by maintenance pemetrexed/bevacizumab versus paclitaxel/carboplatin/bevacizumab followed by maintenance bevacizumab in patients with stage IIIB or IV
J. Patel (2009)
10.1186/s40425-014-0040-2
Response assessment in metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab and bevacizumab: CT tumor size and density as markers for response and outcome
M. Nishino (2014)
10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181e23c8f
Peritoneal Tuberculosis: A Retrospective Review of 20 Cases and Comparison With Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma
C. Choi (2010)
Personalized Medicine: Development of a Predictive Computational Model for Personalized Therapeutic Interventions
N. Kureshi (2013)
10.1016/j.cllc.2011.03.015
Docetaxel vs. vinorelbine in elderly patients with advanced non--small-cell lung cancer: a hellenic oncology research group randomized phase III study.
A. Karampeazis (2011)
10.1002/cncr.25349
Phase 2 trial of preoperative irinotecan plus cisplatin and conformal radiotherapy, followed by surgery for esophageal cancer
J. Knox (2010)
10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.011
Which factors predict bowel complications in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer being treated with bevacizumab?
D. Richardson (2010)
10.1586/era.12.119
Management of advanced lung cancer in resource-constrained settings: a perspective from India
Navneet Singh (2012)
10.1002/cncr.26255
Comparison of tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST in patients treated with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma
J. Edeline (2012)
10.1016/J.ANDO.2011.03.020
Prise en charge des cancers réfractaires de la thyroïde
M. Schlumberger (2011)
10.1002/cncr.24050
Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma
A. Forner (2009)
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2102
Molecular Characteristics Predict Clinical Outcomes: Prospective Trial Correlating Response to the EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Gefitinib with the Presence of Sensitizing Mutations in the Tyrosine Binding Domain of the EGFR Gene
N. Rizvi (2011)
10.1002/cncr.28378
Progression‐free survival: Does a correlation with survival justify its role as a surrogate clinical endpoint?
A. Becker (2014)
10.3390/md7030451
Phase II Study of Biweekly Plitidepsin as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Urothelium
H. Dumez (2009)
See more
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar